ONBC: Some of our readers have commented they read in other sources that some bank robberies were "arranged" by bank managers. By either misreporting the amount of money stolen or by arranging the robbery to begin with, the banks could cover up their losses and be reimbursed through insurance. Did you find any evidence of this practice in your research?

Bryan Burrough: I heard that kind of thing, but never saw it proven. I suspect it was a bit of an urban myth.

You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.

I tend to agree with the urban myth scenario. The Enemies would probably have had to be a little more organized than they were to plan and pull off something like that. Karpis and Dillinger probably could have done it successfully. Also, they pretty much hung around with their own; they would have needed to have more "connections" with bankers and such. One never knows, though. It could definitely be possible these days.

~Just the knowledge that a good book is awaiting one at the end of a long day makes that day happier~ Kathleen Norris

I agree that it seems unlikely that the jobs were set up for this reason, but after the fact, I can see where a bank might increase the missing amount if it was insured. Just knowing there were theives in many lines of work that did not include gun play, and the temptation may have got to some banks hitting hard times.

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers

I am reading Dillinger the Untold Story. The arranged robbery theory is put forth there, not with actual proof but with supporting suspicions (such as why the police would take the long way around to go to a robbery scene). That book also suggests that Dillinger had some underworld connections and really stresses Zarkovich's part in Dillinger's demise. Because PE is a factual book based on the FBI files, it should follow the FBI's findings and not elaborate on all the alternative theories. 70 years after the fact it is hard to know all the details exactly, and there is plenty of room for speculation in other books.

Interesting points...
As far as the police taking the long way around to get to the robbery, I'm reminded of the story one of you intrepid Noodlemantras posted about her relatives being sequestered in their businesses whilst Dillinger had lunch before or after a heist in their small town (or something like that). The story made me realize just how much his very presence could strike fear in the hearts of everyone, including law enforcement. Ergo, it seems somewhat logical that the police wouldn't be exactly eager to jump in and interrupt a robbery in progress, considering the perpetrator was such a vicious, reckless, maniacal killer like Dillinger (according to his press release). Much more better (well, healthier anyway) to arrive on the scene after the fact and then make a show of protecting the public.

In any case, I'm a big fan of conspiracy theories, and I have an unusually suspicious nature to boot. So I'm inclined to believe there are seeds of truth in every urban myth. As we've all pointed out during the discussion, the times were desperate; I don't think the bankers were immune to trying to get away with whatever they could in order to survive, just like everybody else.

When I read the book I had the feeling that Zarkovich might have had a bigger part in the death of Dillinger than could be proven. There just seemed to be some unanswered questions there.

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -
Wow! What a ride!